skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not just Robinhood, IB and WeBull have also suspended GME. Schwab lets me get all the way to confirming an order, but I'm not spending $370 on a share of GME to confirm if it will go through haha. IB/WeBull/Schwab seem to still allow AMC/NOK/BB.

Those are the brokerages I use, can't check in the others.
It's not their money, it's the money from LPs who invested in the fund.
If they ban it will be the beginning of the end for reddit. As i think is the case for Discord.
That's wrong, there's undoubtedly hedge funds who are the same way as WSB.
It's not just RH. I am paying for Interactive Brokers, they also stopped buy transactions.
And as awful as that logic was, the absurdity was surpassed in Gonzales v. Raich [1], when the SC leveraged Wickard to conclude that the commerce clause also allows the federal government to ban activities that could affect prices in illegal markets, too.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich
You realize Robinhood allows you to buy Dogecoin as well, right? Do you not see the hypocrisy?
Because the vibe you would want to make for a pump and dump scheme is an emotional hold it forever mindset.

There's no distinction between the two, if you have that mindset you will be left holding the bag even if you think you won.
You don't think losing his fund would have any personal or reputational effect on him, just because he has plenty of money to live, or do something else?

I don't buy it.
Libertarianism started on the far left, explicitly opposed to private property, largely overlapping with anarchism. Modern US-style right-wing libertarianism basically cribbed most of it but added a property right fetish.

(Dejaque, the founder of libertarianism called Proudhon, the founder of anarchism, a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian")
https://www.powercycletrading.com/what-is-a-high-short-inter....

> Short interest as a percentage of float above 20% is extremely high

> A high NYSE short interest ratio means that the stock market as a whole is vulnerable to a “short-squeeze.” It could rise quickly if new economic data, political news, or other types of information are released that make investors more optimistic.

GME was shorted 140%.

No idea if 20% being risky is sage advice but it seems like you're totally right: some hedge funds took on a massive risk, the market saw the opportunity and played the other side.
shorts get a bad rap for being one of the more transparent cases of profiting from the misfortune of others in finance. and yes, it does create incentives to do other stuff to kill the company, but similar incentives exist with a long position (one way for a symbol to go up is for competitors to fail). so far I haven't read anything suggesting these hedge funds did anything other than take a large short position in $GME.
Has to be somewhat satisfying to know you could take it on though. It is so hard working remotely.
The industry tooling for visualizing software architecture is not adequate.
The brokerage (Robinhood) is absolutely not protecting their clientele. If they were, they would've explained what they were doing when they did it or shortly thereafter. The silence is an indictment.
Apparently Shannon described genius as a response to discovering a source of irritation. If that's universally true of genius, then their ability to reduce their own irritation would imply increased personal happiness. If that irritation were shared by others, reducing it should increase happiness in others, throughout those afflicted.

Certainly medical geniuses increase happiness to others through decreasing disease and the loss of happiness it causes. Don't artistic geniuses do something similar, by elevating their art form to new heights, instilling wonder and awe in their audiences? Perhaps increasing happiness in others is essential to genius. If the genius cares about others, that service to others ought to please themselves too.

Of course, some examples of social psychopathy might also be called genius: Hitler, Stalin, Henry VIII, Pol Pot and many successful politicians possess(ed) a perverse genius for rising to power and wielding it effectively, often at great expense to the happiness of their people. These people did so much damage to so many lives, it's certain they cared little about the happiness of others, nor what their Machiavellianism said about themselves or their impact on history.
I like the idea of reducing the stigma, but honestly if I haven't realized they don't accept PRs by the time I'm looking for the PR tab, I've already done all the same work, kinda for nothing. It ought to be made very clear in README.md or CONTRIBUTING.md or something too.

I do wish people weren't completely closed to PRs though. I think companies are often misled when they think they'll get free labor out of open source, etc. and I think the free-as-in-libre aspect is more important relative to community aspect than a lot of people, but still - I hate it when my only option if I want a bug fixed is to wait for the company to do it themselves or fork. Even if I have to sign over all my rights of the code, I'd so much rather they at least consider taking my PR and be done with it. They don't have to do it for features they don't like or fixes that have downsides. But for a straightforward fix, at least look at it. It might be all the free help you ever get from the community.
The biggest flaw of conventional economic theory is that "people are rational".
There was a murderous insurrection bent on overthrowing democracy about 3 weeks ago. I rather think tempers are high enough that you'd get a lot of affirmative answers right now.
The fund and it's investors may lose a lot. The people running the fund will not. But it's important to remember that it's a matter of scale here. Billions is a lot to a midwestern retail worker who put half his rent check into a volatile stock. It's not a lot to large groups of already-wealthy investors who have a portion of their portfolio invested with this one fund.
That price is based on the last trade to go through on a lit exchange independent of how big it is.

I don’t have a full book feed available to see what the book looks like but on my delayed free feed the last few trades were in the 300-700 sized lots. That’s tiny especially if the internalizers have pulled out.

My guess is that the book is actually showing some gigantic spread where the lowest sell price with any size is tens of dollars off the highest buy orders. But that’s speculation on my part.

[edit] later: just saw a 70k lot clear at $375. Guessing that’s some stops getting hit and clearing that level. The price immediately jumped up over $410. All of this lends credence to my belief that the GME book is crazy one sided and hard to execute into.
Yes, it makes the request high priority: https://medium.com/dev-channel/javascript-loading-priorities...

> than the server just instructing the client not to cache it

Easier said than done, especially when it's served from a CDN you don't control the headers of.

Using a <script> tag and a callback is known as JSONP– this technique is used to bypass Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) for data fetching.
The same is true of short selling. Like I said, short call/long put is equivalent to a short sale (of 100 shares). How much margin is required depends on the type of margin account an investor has and what their other positions are (for some account types).
Wikipedia to the rescue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiler_room_(business)

Notably, public forums are not included as part of a boiler room scam.
It is mostly about the money, but it is also very much about memes, chicken tenders and fucking with the establishment.

What these journalists got wrong or are lying about is wsb being mainly an anti-establishment movement.
This is really messed up. Does anyone here think that Robinhood will allow me to buy any shares soon or will it just be limited?
Thanks for your work - As a former super-mod I know how crazy and thankless it can be. You guys have a real scene going on, it's pretty beautiful.
I think they're suggesting that the statically-linked version of the binary might have ended up published as a release to the public Internet. At which point, it's unclear whether it's possible to "undo" the copyleft infection simply by "unpublishing" the release. People have already potentially downloaded the "infected" release.
So much media is already spinning this to slot it into their preferred narratives.

This type of topic, stock market strategies that not many people understand, is easy enough of a narrative to manipulate. Manipulating more easily understood facts, like a subreddit going private to stop bots, seems lazy!
It's not that clear as far as I can tell (and from reading commentary from people far more knowledgeable than me).

Matt Levine's column from 2 days ago, for example, goes over some of those questions to a decent degree: (possible paywall)

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-26/will-w...
I would say that giving money to a libertarian (or other) candidate is a very clear message that you favor their policies compared to the alternatives. Yes, $100 isn't going to move the needle but neither is your individual vote in the vast majority of cases.
Everyone should utilize this strategy. We’ve been advocating for it for 6 years. AAA keeps upping its fees. Want to attack the system? Attack forced individual arbitration.
I know HN skews mostly from the USA, but after being subscribed to that site for a while I found very few remote jobs (and usually requiring the ability to work in the US).
It’s terrifying because so many people have retirement funds tied up in stocks and this has the potential to decrease everyone’s trust in the idea of stocks.
Please don't put words in my mouth. What I've said is that publication cadence is overwhelming, and academic, much less general-purpose search isn't up to it.
Certainly. It takes money to make money. That rule hasn’t changed yet.

Many of societies big issues are intertwined so hopefully addressing one partially addresses many. The golden rule is particularly nasty: those with the gold make the rules.
When have hedge funds been bailed out by the government? Especially over a single stock? Even if a small hedge fund or two go bankrupt this doesnt affect the economy much and there is no chance the government will bail them out. This isn't all of wallstreet on the line at all.
>It will harm everyone, but at least this Century will be less focused on speculation and more on actual earnings.

It's far more likely that this would lead to narrowly-targeted regulations than some sort of collapse in global finance, as much as some people would like to see the latter.
The conspiracy is real, here's your source: https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/keeping-customers-...
What would "they" do if they were enemies of Robin Hood? Short Robin Hood stock? Or send contract killers?
Are there any stats on how big the short positions are for Gamestop, how this is distributed, and whether they are getting margin calls?
It’ll have to be p2p maybe with super nodes to replicate.

You will want a data mesh layer that multiple apps run on top of probably.
> E.g. Defining a weapon > {sword, wand} hierarchy, with respective properties for melee and casting, and then defining a unique weapon spellsword which is capable of both melee and casting. You could inherit from weapon, and copy & paste sword/wand code, or inherit from sword/wand, and copy & paste the other, but the hierarchy is broken.

Or, you could, in OO Python:

class SpellSword(Sword, Wand):
...

or, possibly even:

class Melee:

class Casting:

class Sword(Melee):

class Wand(Casting):

class SpellSword(Melee, Casting):

> So instead of representing the relationships as a tree of inheritance, you represent it as a graph of components (properties).

Multiple inheritance also represents relationships as a graph of properties.
You don't think the shorts are getting a chance out of their positions here?
how can robin hood stop me from buying certian stocks? is this legal?find another platform.
While I enjoy the esprit de corp of this particular discussion, the recurring allusions to "David vs Goliath"-esque tales are rather cringe-inducing and really speak to the maturity level of those involved (if that wasn't already clear by their "tendies").
> I get worried at any potential signal that Rust is headed in that direction. Which it might not be.

I think they do - but that's good! We need a language like Rust to write operation systems, databases, proxys, webservers, hey maybe even browsers. All the things that are widely used and need to be high performant and secure.

Maybe you are using Rust, but you actually really want a different language, one that doesn't focus so much on low level / performance?

Haskell or Scala or F# come to my mind. I'm listing statically typed languages, because I assume you like those (otherwise, why Rust and not sticking to Elixir).
They're nearly the same thing in the hedge fund's case. Most of them take some variant of 2&20 still, so 20% of fund profits is their revenue.
Show HN: Manage your notifications from one location
Shorting a stock 140% is the market manipulation and should be criminal. Anything a large group does after some hedge fund pulls that stunt is fair game.
That's what I hinted at with my third sentence.
The bubble only needs to pop though if GME management screws it up.

GME has now become a $25B hedge fund with a gaming focus. They absolutely have the ability to become long term successful given these black swans they just experienced.

Now, I know *nothing* about their management, but they at least have been given a chance. Their's an Eminem song that they should be playing throughout their buildings right now. If I were them I'd sell more shares, pay down any bad debt, and invest in 10-100 of the best black swan ideas of my rank and file and see what happens.
Internet in Germany. It's slow and expensive. I hope Starlink will disrupt this industry.
Fidelity, BlackRock, Vanguard, Morgan Stanley. All the usual players. Combined they own nearly 40%
> Even more with some irresponsible newspapers blaming the whole thing on GamerGate and Alt-Right, effectively pushing away people that previously could be on their side.

I didn't read any such claim in my German and Scandinavian news diet, is this a US-only thing? Here, the consensus seems to be that what happens is a somewhat well-deserved embarrassment.
There was some analysis done recently, though not being a crypto expert I don't know how relevant it is:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25722076#25724978

One note: Telegram doesn't need to "allow" experts to audit their code - E2E is all in the clients which have source available. I don't think it's had enough scrutiny to be trustworthy though.
What narrative am I coming with? My comment is questioning the prevailing David vs Goliath narrative. Based on past events, I think there is enough of a prior probability of astroturfing to be skeptical. We will find out whether this was organic or not as things evolve.

But it would be a mistake to not think that some hedge fund manager, oligarch, etc. somewhere is paying attention and thinking about how they might be able to co-opt.
Losing billions of dollars in one of the biggest trading stories ever seems fairly consequential and will likely affect their future behaviour. That combined with the newfound knowledge that the type of trade they made can be picked up on and exploited is also likely to affect their future behaviour (i.e. don't do that again).
A lens to look at this through is - "why is short selling allowed?" Advocates cite increased "liquidity." But, does society really benefit? Short-selling really just lets trading firms extract value from the failure of others. In that sense - professional trading firms that participate in short-selling could be grouped into a monolithic "Wall Street" in the sense that they are extracting value without a benefit for society.
I feel like we're bordering on religion here (which means it doesn't have to be grounded in logic) and its possible that people who were rewarded for holding bitcoin have happily added an extra punt to this campaign. If you can click all the buttons to deal with crypto then I don't imagine its too hard to trade without Robin Hood.
The commerce clause was intended to create a free trade zone between the states, which at that time were engaging in trade wars with each other.

Then it was misinterpreted in Wickard to permit nearly limitless power to Congress.

So yes, in a new Constitution we would want a commerce clause, and we would want it never to be interpreted in such a manner.
>a workable plan that enables more free speech, [...] That approach: build protocols, not platforms. To be clear, this is an approach that would bring us back to the way the internet used to be. The early internet involved many different protocols—instructions and standards that anyone could then use to build a compatible interface.

As I've commented before[1][2], discussing protocols and advocating for them is a popular topic but it does not make progress.

The real issue is funding and trying to make humans do what they don't want to do.

If HN is overrepresented by vanguards of decentralization and free speech, why are a lot of us here on HN instead of running USENET nodes and posting to a newsgroup such as "comp.programming.hackernews" to avoid being moderated by dang?

If most of HN knows how to set up git and stand up a web server, why do most of use Github instead of running Gitlab on a home pc/laptop/RaspberryPi or rent a Digital Ocean vps?

It's because "free & open protocols" weren't really the issue!

A lot of us don't want to run a USENET node or manage our own git server to share code.

[1] the so-called "open" internet of free protocols:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20231960

[2] free & royalty free protocol like Signal still doesn't solve the "who pays for running the server" problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20232499
Do you see all trading on the stock market as speculative and basically gambling?
So, the SEC is hands off and encourages self regulation, so any instance of self regulation is considered government intervention?
I agree with this mostly, but you can't deny that the swift action Wall Street firms/brokers have made to protect the interests of those effected hedge funds.
>Do you want wall street suits to fear for their life?

Well... yes? For less than what this guys did Louis XVI lost his head.

They can do what they want and suffer no consequences, of any sort. Neither economic (they get bailed out by us) nor personal (virtually nobody gets personally prosecuted and sent to jail). Why should they stop what they're doing? In their position, I wouldn't.
Getting burned on fixed bid work is a higher risk from what I've experience over the decades with all types of clients.
Eh, I’ve seen enough viral memes in my day to believe this happened without an orchestrator.
> Income inequality self corrects through one of three mechanisms: war, revolution, or famine. Wealth of people under the age of 40 as a percentage of total wealth has gone from 19 percent to 9 percent in the last 30 years and this is effectively a form of revolution. People are fed up with the financial industrial complex, which favors the already-rich and people over the age of 40.

There's a lot to be said for this. It may be the one thing the QAnons and the AOC wing of the Democrats actually agree on, although the Q lot pick the wrong targets. Conversely, it's the one thing that "centrists" (if there are any true centrists left) refuse to acknowledge or plan for.

It's not going to be solved by a shaman storming the capitol. It's not going to be solved by memeing stocks, that's obviously going to get slapped down. But the people aggrieved are going to keep .. testing the fences, like the raptors in Jurassic Park.
I tried through IB and could not buy GME stock either.
Yeah, I do mine on the right, and keep the browser on my right-hand monitor, so the list of tabs is way at one side of my view. It's worked really well for me.
It's not a HOA. Several states in the southwest have laws prohibiting/restricting rainwater collection.
It seems like concern trolling tbh.
Apple Data Privacy Day: IDFA opt-in required in upcoming beta
Yes, it was this event and not say the 2008 crisis.
Again, it's a "Rules for thee but not for me" situation.

And as it turns out, people are very angry about that. And since violence gets you thrown in jail, the next is financial violence in bankrupting these country-destroying fintech scabs.

And look who comes to their rescue, but not for the masses.
I know this is totally irrelevant to your product, and it actually looks quite cool, but the name is one letter away from Arpaio, the name of arguably one of the most racist and anti-Latino "law enforcement" officials in the US. Might be worth thinking about.
I saw this recently https://m5stack.com/products/m5paper-esp32-development-kit-9...

The company M5 makes incredible gear for this. Their ESP32-Pico Atom chips are all I use.
... this would be a great reply if my situation didn't happen months ago.

Discord didn't ban them after they got proof an admin was spamming the word nigger, you think they got banned over some unicode letters?

The place was choc full of racist garbage, not typical WSB edgy satire, rtfa.

-

There is another WSB discord which used to be the one linked, had tens if not hundreds of thousands of users, and never devolved to the level that one did.

Know why? Because the mods weren't the type of people who spam nigger.
Peasants suspected their king was getting away with raping villagers. Peasants came together and decided to show the king. They started to rape each other in the broad daylight. When the town sheriff intervened, they cried out foul, "Why is the notion of rape such a one way street?"

When the dust finally settled and anuses stopped bleeding, they discovered that they were coaxed to rape each other by Kings son who disguised himself as a commoner in the village subreddit. What made it worse was that King's son was involved in raping during the rape fest but somehow avoided getting raped himself.
It is clear from your comments you have no clue what you're talking about. Stop spreading misinformation.

Read matt levine's twitter: https://twitter.com/matt_levine/status/1354129838806872073

and newsletter if you want to inform yourself.
Exactly. And I suppose not too many are aware of the fraud that’s been exposed by short sellers who usually pay the costs associated with investigating fraud. Wirecard or Enron, anyone?
Good. The field of play should carry these kinds of risks.

Maybe betting on success is not a bad thing.
Pretty much all media coverage of the GME thing boils down to “oh no! The wrong type of people are manipulating the stock market this time!” It’s pretty sickening and transparent. CNBC is like the propaganda arm of Wall Street.
Yes.

We are near levels of inequality that caused the French Revolution to go violent.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean but I guess that would men that regulations are 'concern trolling'?

When I see 'concern trolling' I usually think of it as just a term slapped on something to hand wave and ignore it.
The Burroughs mentioned by Knuth, already had tagged memory, a systems programming language with unsafe code blocks, co-routines, bounds checking, the whole package, Go like compile speed (for 1961 hardware), compiler intrisics instead of Assembly, the whole package.

Nowadays still available as Unisys ClearPath MCP, with high level security as selling point, while it will take generations to fix UNIX and C's adoption at large, if ever.
Samsung says auto chip shortage could hit smartphones
> a few medium-sized hedge funds were caught doing something stupid and the market has rightfully taught them a lesson.

Individually, what they were doing (shorting that stock) might have been perfectly sensible. That they collectively overshorted made them vulnerable. I'm not convinced yet that it was stupid.
They're so disconnected that losing billions doesn't matter?

The problem is bigger than originally conceived then.